Cool Reception for Plan To Let Elderly Ride Free

By ALISON LEIGH COWAN

Published: May 13, 2007

To many commuters in Connecticut, the state's overworked mass transit system would be vastly improved by an infusion of new rail cars providing more seats and new bus routes to cover more ground.

But to Senator Donald E. Williams Jr., the system would also benefit from the infusion of something old, namely more residents 65 and older. Lots of them.

Mr. Williams, the president pro tem of the State Senate, introduced a measure now before the General Assembly that would let elderly residents ride free on trains and buses during off-peak hours.

Yet the Connecticut chapter of AARP is not lobbying for the free ride -- ''It wasn't our proposal,'' said John Erlingheuser, the group's advocacy director -- preferring that the money to go toward shoring up a different program already in place.

That, and the opposition of a statewide commuter organization, has not stopped Mr. Williams, a Democrat from the rural town of Brooklyn on the eastern fringe of the state, from pressing ahead.

Mass transit agencies around the country are offering discounted fares to elderly residents, from Charlotte, N. C., to Portland, Ore., which diplomatically calls its program an ''honored citizens'' fare.

Yet few, if any, places have gone as far as Pennsylvania did in 1973, when it introduced free rides for elderly residents at off-peak times, subsidizing the program with funds from the state-run lottery.

''My understanding is that it's the only state that does that,'' said Virginia Miller, a spokeswoman for the American Passenger Transport Association in Washington, which represents transit agencies.

In Connecticut , the measure introduced by Senator Williams, which would cost the state an estimated $9.7 million a year, is being debated as part of the budget-wrangling in Hartford.

Because his party holds a veto-proof majority in both houses, bills that carry Senator's Williams's imprimatur have a good chance of becoming law, whether or not Gov. M. Jodi Rell or her fellow Republicans agree with them. In this case, the governor's spokesman, Chris Cooper, said that Governor Rell was interested in seeing the final language but had qualms about the cost of the program and the risk that it could cause overcrowding on buses and trains.

For now, Senator Williams shows little sign of retreating. In his view, offering the state's 480,000 elderly residents a powerful incentive to board buses and trains is ''a natural idea'' that helps maintain the independence of people who have given up driving and eases traffic congestion.

In addition, he said that by having more elderly residents using the trains and buses, ''We build a stronger and more powerful constituency for improvement and expansion of public transportation.''

Mr. Erlingheuser said his group would rather see the proposed subsidies go toward dial-a-ride services currently used in 136 Connecticut towns and cities, which typically pick up and discharge elderly and disabled passengers at their door and are credited with keeping many people from becoming housebound.

Sponsors of these programs were promised they could share up to $5 million a year in matching state grants when the law was approved eight years ago, but for six years legislators did not subsidize the program. They then appropriated only $6.1 million for fiscal 2006 and 2007, leaving an anticipated $3.9 million shortfall.

Without state funds, Mr. Erlingheuser said, operators of existing programs are skittish about continuing, and the few dozen municipalities without programs are sitting on the fence.

''At the end of the day, does anyone who is of a certain age need a free bus or train ride?'' Mr. Erlingheuser asked. ''No. Are there people who have no access to any transportation who face insurmountable obstacles? Yes.''

For its part, he said his group preferred ''fully funding what we do know seniors need and rely on before we start talking about other transportation proposals.''

Nor is that group the only one that is not sold on the free rides. At a public hearing, Jim Cameron, a Darien resident who is chairman of the Connecticut Rail Commuter Council, called the proposal a ''feel-good bill based on a false premise'' that the rail system has any capacity to give away.

''In Hartford, on the bus, maybe there are empty seats,'' Mr. Cameron said. ''I can tell you on Metro-North, whether it's peak or off-peak, there are not empty seats.''

He predicted ugly clashes between commuters paying hundreds of dollars for their monthly tickets and affluent retirees from Greenwich or Darien riding the train to New York free to see a Broadway show.

''I'm not insensitive to the seniors if they want to take the train,'' Mr. Cameron said, ''but they're not taking it every day, and they already get a 50 percent fare cut.''

Another concern that has been raised is that the cost to taxpayers could balloon if the giveaway proves too popular. The estimate prepared by the nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis in January that put the cost of the program at $9.7 million a year was made on the assumption that there would be ''no significant increase in overall ridership.''

The analysts factored in 1 million free rides on off-peak trains and 2 million on buses, but they warned that ''the estimate could significantly escalate'' if the program proved too popular.

Dan Brucker, a spokesman for the Metro-North Railroad in New York, which operates the New Haven line for New York and Connecticut, said any decision to allow the state's elderly residents to ride free was strictly ''a State of Connecticut issue.''

''The cost of that missing revenue would have to be borne by the state of Connecticut,'' said Mr. Brucker, noting that Connecticut already shoulders 65 percent of the losses incurred by its interstate trains, and paid $52 million to Metro-North last year as its share.

Senior citizens who had gathered at Stamford's government center on Tuesday, some to play bridge, others to have their blood pressure checked, practice their tai chi and enjoy a subsidized lunch with friends, were divided on the wisdom of the proposed legislation.

''Even if I don't use it, I think it's a valuable service,'' said Rea Greenman, 87, a former customer service specialist.

But told that the association for retired persons preferred to finance the dial-a-ride programs, Ms. Greenman cooled quickly on the notion of a free train ride. ''I really think the dial-a-ride is more important than the train,'' she said. ''How often do senior citizens go out of town?''

Jim Goodridge, 95, was even more opposed to the proposal.

''What are the train people going to say if the trains are full of people and no money?'' Mr. Goodridge asked.

''Well, if it's off-peak, no one should care,'' countered Lois PontBriant, a fellow bridge player.

''The trains are crowded now,'' Mr. Goodridge said.

Many younger commuters approached at the Stamford train station were more cavalier about the proposal.

''I don't think it will appreciably add to the numbers riding the trains,'' said Richard Noyes, an executive with Cisco Systems. ''It's such a small issue -- the money -- when we spend $10 million on pork projects.''

And boarding a New York-bound train, Steve Striffler said that even if he had to stand once in a while, ''I don't oppose the elderly riding for free.'' After all, he said, ''They've earned it.''

Ernie Matarasso, who described himself as an occasional rider, urged another approach altogether.

''Do what they do with the museums,'' Mr. Matarasso recommended. ''Make it voluntary. If a couple of wealthy people get on without paying, so be it. It's the advantage of being old.''

Photo: Jacqueline Werner, 73, of Washington, D.C., says that money proposed for giving the elderly free rides could be better spent elsewhere. (Photo by Christopher Capozziello for The New York Times)